What is the role of art?

[Cecilianus]

But the statues aren’t sacraments, meaning they aren’t required, only used by those that need them. So they are a crutch for those that need them. I don’t mean to belittle it, but you have to call a spade a spade.

And my point is - we all need them. They are sacramentals. One can be saved without them, but you will never reach a point in spiritual maturity where things like icons and holy water become unnecessary or cease to be useful. And the Church requires that the holy icons be venerated and incensed not because of their use for any individual person, but rather because they are holy and ought to be honored. And, as you have pointed out (preaching fully to the choir), they are holy because of Whom they make present.

 

[jonfawkes]

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. The there are 7 sacraments. Most of us only receive 5 or 6 of them, there is no mandate for sacramentals, just sacraments.

Peace

 

[edwest2]

But the statues aren’t sacraments, meaning they aren’t required, only used by those that need them. So they are a crutch for those that need them. I don’t mean to belittle it, but you have to call a spade a spade.

I suggest you go to a local Church and ask the priest why the statues are there. They have always existed once physical Churches were established. You seem to only want to split hairs. If they were unnecessary, I’m certain they would not have been put there in the first place.

Peace,
Ed

 

[jonfawkes]

They have been there from tradition to educate when the masses were illiterate. Same with stained glass windows, and paintings.

 

[Cecilianus]

Or perhaps it’s just the difference between the way images are used in East and West. I don’t really know how statues are precisely viewed in the West - whether they are truly sacramentals are just psychological crutches. I’ve never seen a priest incense a statue - on the other hand, I thought that it was an act of sacrilege to throw one away if it had been blessed. But in the Byzantine Church, icons ARE holy, they ARE given honor, and they ARE essential to our worship, and they do really convey the mystery being represented rather than just being present as psychological aids.

Christ is Born! Glorify Him!

Peace

 

[jonfawkes]

There is a protocol for disposing of them. I don’t know all the details. They are to be buried. Prior to burial if they can be burned they should be burned. If they can be smashed they should be smashed etc. They are treated with respect.

 

[donsnow]

Or perhaps it’s just the difference between the way images are used in East and West. I don’t really know how statues are precisely viewed in the West - whether they are truly sacramentals are just psychological crutches. I’ve never seen a priest incense a statue - on the other hand, I thought that it was an act of sacrilege to throw one away if it had been blessed. But in the Byzantine Church, icons ARE holy, they ARE given honor, and they ARE essential to our worship, and they do really convey the mystery being represented rather than just being present as psychological aids.

Christ is Born! Glorify Him!

Peace

Hi, Cecilianus,

Once, during Mass at the Cathedral in the '80’s, I heard a priest explain the statues and images on the windows from a time before photography. There was no photography when the statues and window images were first initiated. Those statues and window images served the same purpose then as photographs do nowadays.

I will allow, there may be people who erroneously worship the statues, therefore “idolizing” them; but, that is only for those individuals, not for the rest of us.

Now, Cecilianus, this next is not meant for you, but for other posters. And, as long as movie and pop singer stars are also idolized, why point to only the few individuals who idolize the statues?

 

[jonfawkes]

Hi, Cecilianus,

Once, during Mass at the Cathedral in the '80’s, I heard a priest explain the statues and images on the windows from a time before photography. There was no photography when the statues and window images were first initiated. Those statues and window images served the same purpose then as photographs do nowadays.

I will allow, there may be people who erroneously worship the statues, therefore “idolizing” them; but, that is only for those individuals, not for the rest of us.

Now, Cecilianus, this next is not meant for you, but for other posters. And, as long as movie and pop singer stars are also idolized, why point to only the few individuals who idolize the statues?

My tack in this idolatry part of the thread is

If you sanctify an object then that object holds power over you. In the realm of secular art occasionally people use religious imagery in a profane way. Some people find this very upsetting. They are giving these secular artists power over them. By profaning these things, they aren’t doing anything to the things they represent. Having ants crawl over a crucifix doesn’t do any thing to the sacrifice that Jesus made, nothing to the devotion that Catholics hold to the Lord. The crucifix is just a man made thing. It is just a stand in. Who cares what some jerk does to it. It means nothing to the faith.

 

[3DOCTORS]

Thank you, 3DOCTORS!,

I’ll accept the pondering smiley in the spirit in which it’s tendered . And, yes it beats all those other things.

God loves you and yours,
Don

You’re very welcome, Don! Though if you drive a car as elderly as mine, actually, that can of WD-40 might not be a bad thing to have! Squirt a little into the choke and varoom! she’s off!

God bless my late Dad who showed me a thing or two about carburetors!

 

[Cecilianus]

My tack in this idolatry part of the thread is

If you sanctify an object then that object holds power over you. In the realm of secular art occasionally people use religious imagery in a profane way. Some people find this very upsetting. They are giving these secular artists power over them. By profaning these things, they aren’t doing anything to the things they represent. Having ants crawl over a crucifix doesn’t do any thing to the sacrifice that Jesus made, nothing to the devotion that Catholics hold to the Lord. The crucifix is just a man made thing. It is just a stand in. Who cares what some jerk does to it. It means nothing to the faith.

It’s not “just a man made thing”; it’s a symbol of our Lord. Desecrating it is sacrilegious and offensive. How could you love Jesus and shrug something like that off with “who cares”?

 

[jonfawkes]

You are giving them the sword by which to slay you.

 

[Cecilianus]

You are giving them the sword by which to slay you.

Getting offended and hurt is sometimes the price of love. It would be callous not to be offended by something like that.

 

[JDaniel]

The same way I respect my car. I take care of it, Give it proper maintenance etc but I don’t worship my car. I know it is just a “thing”.

Then you need to purchase one of those new Swedish $1.5 million dollar cars; the one that goes from zero to 100 MPH in 3.1 seconds. Then let’s talk about “worship.”

Sorry, I don’t have the website, but, Yahoo’s home page showed it within the past few days. 3.1 seconds would give me irremediable whiplash!

God bless,
jd

 

[jonfawkes]

Getting offended and hurt is sometimes the price of love. It would be callous not to be offended by something like that.

Then you are in love with the “thing”. What is represented by the “thing” still receives your love regardless whether the “thing” is profaned or not. If a picture of your mother is ruined does it make you love your mother less. Does it make her love you any less. No.

 

[edwest2]

Back to the OP. The role of art is to communicate a clear message. For Catholics, statues call to mind actual people and an actual presence. The monstrance that holds the Eucharist during adoration is meant to illustrate the reality and glory of Christ as the Eucharist. It is designed for this purpose. To simply call it a piece of metal denies its message and purpose.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Cecilianus]

Then you are in love with the “thing”. What is represented by the “thing” still receives your love regardless whether the “thing” is profaned or not. If a picture of your mother is ruined does it make you love your mother less. Does it make her love you any less. No.

It makes you angry that someone insulted your mother.

 

[Cecilianus]

Then you are in love with the “thing”. What is represented by the “thing” still receives your love regardless whether the “thing” is profaned or not. If a picture of your mother is ruined does it make you love your mother less. Does it make her love you any less. No.

And I do love my icons, because I love my Mother and her Son.

 

[jonfawkes]

It makes you angry that someone insulted your mother.

That’s my point - only if you let it. If you realize that it’s just a childish act on their part and does nothing to harm your mother nor you it’s not insulting, just silly. A tantrum.

 

[Cecilianus]

That’s my point - only if you let it. If you realize that it’s just a childish act on their part and does nothing to harm your mother nor you it’s not insulting, just silly. A tantrum.

That’s a pretty harsh word to describe the attitude and behavior of the Iconophile Saints and Fathers of the Church. And yes, it is insulting, whether it makes you angry or not, because it is really an image of your mother that is being spat upon and torn up.

 

[jonfawkes]

That’s a pretty harsh word to describe the attitude and behavior of the Iconophile Saints and Fathers of the Church. And yes, it is insulting, whether it makes you angry or not, because it is really an image of your mother that is being spat upon and torn up.

I meant it was a silly tantrum by the one doing the profaning. There’s no need to be insulted. Like a child telling you “you stink”.